PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
40.40 - 41.05
29.80 - 47.18
2.12M / 3.66M (Avg.)
18.02 | 2.27
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
5.73%
Revenue growth under 50% of CVE's 20.89%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
14.09%
Gross profit growth at 75-90% of CVE's 16.01%. Bill Ackman would demand operational improvements to match competitor gains.
104.96%
EBIT growth above 1.5x CVE's 34.41%. David Dodd would confirm if core operations or niche positioning yield superior profitability.
104.96%
Operating income growth above 1.5x CVE's 34.41%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent cost or pricing advantages drive this outperformance.
64.88%
Net income growth under 50% of CVE's 145.98%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
64.56%
EPS growth under 50% of CVE's 145.45%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper structural issues or share dilution limiting per-share gains.
64.56%
Diluted EPS growth under 50% of CVE's 145.45%. Michael Burry would worry about an eroding competitive position or excessive dilution.
-0.91%
Share reduction while CVE is at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
49.35%
Maintaining or increasing dividends while CVE cut them. John Neff might see a strong edge in shareholder returns.
8.27%
OCF growth under 50% of CVE's 56.17%. Michael Burry might suspect questionable revenue recognition or rising costs.
21.80%
FCF growth under 50% of CVE's 78.56%. Michael Burry would suspect weaker operating efficiencies or heavier capex burdens.
-56.46%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while CVE stands at 25.88%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
21.99%
5Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CVE's 69.17%. Michael Burry would suspect a significant competitive gap or product weakness.
5.31%
3Y revenue/share CAGR under 50% of CVE's 33.16%. Michael Burry might see a serious short-term decline in relevance vs. the competitor.
-65.22%
Both show negative 10Y OCF/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would question if the entire market or product set is shrinking or too capital-intensive.
191.43%
5Y OCF/share CAGR is similar to CVE's 184.85%. Walter Schloss might see parallel cost profiles or expansions producing comparable cash flow.
-31.84%
Negative 3Y OCF/share CAGR while CVE stands at 3.43%. Joel Greenblatt would demand an urgent turnaround in the firm’s cost or revenue drivers.
-134.36%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-115.16%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while CVE is 190.67%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-237.14%
Negative 3Y CAGR while CVE is 239.25%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
-86.88%
Both are negative. Martin Whitman suspects the segment is in decline or saddled with persistent unprofitability or write-downs.
-59.33%
Both show negative equity/share growth mid-term. Martin Whitman suspects cyclical or structural challenges for each company.
-56.57%
Both show negative short-term equity/share CAGR. Martin Whitman suspects an industry slump or unprofitable expansions for both players.
-85.59%
Both reduced dividends long-term. Martin Whitman might check if sector-level headwinds forced universal cuts.
90.00%
Stable or rising mid-term dividends while CVE is cutting. John Neff sees an edge in consistent payouts vs. the competitor.
96.33%
Our short-term dividend growth is positive while CVE cut theirs. John Neff views it as a comparative advantage in shareholder returns.
0.08%
AR growth is negative/stable vs. CVE's 11.87%, indicating tighter credit discipline. David Dodd confirms it doesn't hamper actual sales.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-0.95%
Negative asset growth while CVE invests at 2.29%. Joel Greenblatt checks if the competitor might capture more market share unless our returns remain higher.
-2.60%
We have a declining book value while CVE shows 3.14%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-9.01%
Both reduce debt yoy. Martin Whitman sees a broader sector shift to safer balance sheets or less growth impetus.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-6.01%
Both reduce SG&A yoy. Martin Whitman sees a cost war or cyclical slowdown forcing overhead cuts.